Three prominent IP groups propose amending § 101 to clarify
what is patentable subject matter. The American Bar Association
(ABA) IP Section, and the Intellectual Property Owners Association
(IPO) in a joint proposal with the American Intellectual Property
Law Association (AIPLA), cited the need resolve ambiguity in §
101 jurisprudence caused by recent Supreme Court decisions.
Both proposals keep the current four categories of patentable
subject matter: process, machine, manufacture, and composition of
matter, or any useful improvement thereof. Also, both proposals add
language that explicitly exclude § 102, 103, or 112
considerations from the eligibility inquiry.
Where the proposals differ is how they define exceptions to
eligibility. For the ABA IP Section, recent Supreme Court decisions
shows that their primary concern with eligibility is the ability to
claim the building blocks of innovation, which include laws of
nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas.